Are the Mac Pros ever coming???

[nanofrog]

It's not, given some of the posts I've seen in this thread.

But obviously I can't back that up without causing problems, and neither can the original posters. Some people in this thread are making things up, but I've seen one post specifically that matches the little I've heard about the Mac Pro.

The leverage Apple has is that if people who they keep in the know start talking, the flow of information stops.

I realize that NDA's would be in effect for as yet unreleased products, but offering up 3rd party proof (i.e. email, fax, ...) on something that has already occurred (i.e. product already released into the wild), shouldn't be a violation.

My main issue however, isn't with that fact that this sort of communication has occurred, but that it's targeted at a minority of the MP's purchaser audience, which is independents and SMB's (only looking back at Intel based systems).

Most of the large houses I'm aware of, are using PC based servers, and likely with custom software (Pixar for example). So users might sit at MP's to set up their runs, but the "heavy lifting" in large companies seems to be on PC clusters from what I've seen/heard (i.e. photographs of large company computer rooms with racks of PC servers, and text descriptions stating they're used for rendering, ... ).

 

[ClassObject]

I realize that NDA's would be in effect for as yet unreleased products, but offering up 3rd party proof (i.e. email, fax, ...) on something that has already occurred (i.e. product already released into the wild), shouldn't be a violation.

My main issue however, isn't with that fact that this sort of communication has occurred, but that it's targeted at a minority of the MP's purchaser audience, which is independents and SMB's (only looking back at Intel based systems).

Most of the large houses I'm aware of, are using PC based servers, and likely with custom software (Pixar for example). So users might sit at MP's to set up their runs, but the "heavy lifting" in large companies seems to be on PC clusters from what I've seen/heard (i.e. photographs of large company computer rooms with racks of PC servers, and text descriptions stating they're used for rendering, ... ).

Photography, video, and music are small potatoes and out of date. The main push now is web content. That includes all mentioned but any hardware can do that. Money now is in linux hardware to serve the masses and workstations to feed the masses. Most choose laptops. I don't but most do. If you need a desktop to feed the masses, you need something to run VMs and write code. Same is true of a laptop but you need battery. Mac pro is cool and all, and it's what I prefer, but laptops will win for current pro needs. Times are changing

 

[goMac]

Interesting article out today on the Mac Pro:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/251854/apples_mac_pro_users_want_hardware_upgrade.html

 

[InuNacho]

• Start using Thunderbolt. The good news is it looks like that in the very near future Thunderbolt will be fast enough for GPUs or RAID arrays, so the functionality loss over the Mac Pro won't be as severe.

I remember reading about those external Thunderbolt GPUs at CES and that they don't work under OS X, only Windows. Who knows, maybe they'll work under ML.

 

[DisMyMac]

Interesting article out today on the Mac Pro:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/251854/apples_mac_pro_users_want_hardware_upgrade.html

"A dual-socket Mac Pro based on the new chips with 16 processors could potentially outperform iMacs and store more data."

'Could potentially'?

 

[thekev]

Maybe if you perform some crazy ritual and sacrifice a chicken the Mac Pro will get an update. It might even be within the next year if you use a big chicken.

I wouldn't.

Fortunately, I'm feeling more optimistic about that future recently. When it happens, you'll have a few options:

• Start using Thunderbolt. The good news is it looks like that in the very near future Thunderbolt will be fast enough for GPUs or RAID arrays, so the functionality loss over the Mac Pro won't be as severe.
• Switch to Linux, because Windows 8 looks to abandoning pros as well.

Microsoft doesn't make hardware or write drivers. Those are two of the big issues that are handled by those making the hardware on that side.

iMacs cool nicely. Have you ever felt the back of a Mac Pro? Just as hot really...

With something like Thunderbolt the advantage is the GPU and RAID is outside the machine anyway for cooling.

I wonder how the internal temperatures compare. Anyway external GPUs aren't exactly an advantage given the extra cost for the enclosure, and GPUs aren't going that direction anyway. I don't see such a thing being a great idea. Thunderbolt in itself is a bit weird with the low number of ports and requirements for daisy chaining. Daisy chaining is also supposedly not lossless, not that I expected it to perfect.

Even if you did stick it outside of the machine, are you doing thunderbolt to gpu to external display? Are you expecting it to be leveraged in powering the internal display? Has any of this been tested to work smoothly?

"A dual-socket Mac Pro based on the new chips with 16 processors could potentially outperform iMacs and store more data."

'Could potentially'?

Typically with articles about untested hardware they say things like "could" as they haven't technically verified it, or at least that's what I've observed in the past.

 

[goMac]

Even if you did stick it outside of the machine, are you doing thunderbolt to gpu to external display? Are you expecting it to be leveraged in powering the internal display? Has any of this been tested to work smoothly?

It seems to be a strategy a lot of laptop makers are investing in. It would be an external display, obviously. My plan b would be to have some sort of Mac laptop that I could dock to a GPU and external display when I get home.

I'd loose some of the cores of my Mac Pro, and possibly RAM, but it's better than nothing.

 

[thekev]

It seems to be a strategy a lot of laptop makers are investing in. It would be an external display, obviously. My plan b would be to have some sort of Mac laptop that I could dock to a GPU and external display when I get home.

I'd loose some of the cores of my Mac Pro, and possibly RAM, but it's better than nothing.

This is the kind of thing I'd expect to flop. It's been suggested many times, but I don't expect the cost to benefit ratio to be so great. I know Sony was doing something like this, and I saw one or two third party enclosures. I haven't seen any other oems or packaged solutions which would make more sense given the wide variation in requirements, but obviously that doesn't mean they don't exist.

By the way, the imac and the top macbook pro have the same gpu, yet Barefeats still suggests that the imac gets better framerates in gaming. For OpenGL heavy applications, I'm not sure how they compare.

 

[xgman]

iMacs cool nicely. Have you ever felt the back of a Mac Pro? Just as hot really...

Except is has large exhaust fans and a perforated case.

 

[deconstruct60]

Microsoft doesn't make hardware or write drivers. Those are two of the big issues that are handled by those making the hardware on that side.

Hmm, the whole Xbox 360 division is a mirage ? And these guys spent years not working on drivers?
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/08/22/building-robust-usb-3-0-support.aspx

Microsoft doesn't write 100% of the drivers. But neither does Apple ( missing xHCI for OS X being the most glaring current example.). However, they do a common subset so that most stuff works in a basic mode.

Thunderbolt in itself is a bit weird with the low number of ports

That's Apple's implementation more so than what can do with it. The upper end iMac has 2. The MBPs probably could have 2 if weren't constrained to having ports only on one side ( e.g. move one of the USB ports to the other side. )

Thunderbolt can only have 7 devices. More than 2 is somewhat goofy because you can't really a whole desktop full of devices connected. It is not USB.

and requirements for daisy chaining. Daisy chaining is also supposedly not lossless, not that I expected it to perfect.

Daisy chaining is lossless. What I think refering to is reduced bandwidth to remote audio USB. ( e.g., Anantech reports of combos of TB display with audio USB device hooked up along with a Promise RAID on same device). TB has fixed bandwidth. If you put too many devices on a controller and demand isochronous delivery some of them aren't going to get a timeslice.

It is only PCI-e 4x worth of bandwidth. If the user pile ups 5-7x worth of bandwidth on the TB sockets all of it isn't going to get through when used concurrently on heavy workload.

 

[deconstruct60]

This is the kind of thing I'd expect to flop. It's been suggested many times, but I don't expect the cost to benefit ratio to be so great.

Right market it could work. I think you may be constraining to the upper end of the GPU market. For those Mac laptops that are soley stuck with HD3000 or HD4000 and are midrange users an external GPU will put some more life into their laptop ( e.g., MBA ).


For example. right now Apple feels that the TB Display will work. $999.

That's probably going to get competition from

$299 TB docking port with a Display Port connector. (e.g., 1 DP port, 1 FW 800 port , 1 eSATA port , 2-3 USB ports ).

$599 24"-27" IPS Monitor with a Display Port connector plus a few others ( not high color gamut, but a very good mainstream monitor)

which at around $899 is $100 cheaper than Apple's solution. Apple doesn't completely dominate the monitors connected to Mac Pros. Apple isn't going to completely dominate the monitors connected to the laptops either.

If IPS monitors slide down $100 to $499, then a $299-399 docking port (probably chuck the eSATA port for PCI-e slot) with a $150 card ( $1048) is in the same price range as the $999 TB display. Throw out an external IPS monitor and it works now. There are lots of mainstream displays at $399 that many folks use everyday.

If enough TB laptops get out there a vendor with a TB monitor that was a bit more like HP's Z1.

http://www.hp.com/united-states/campaigns/workstations/z1_features.html

only without the CPU , disk drive parts would work. Just a PCI-e slot hidden behind the LCD panel so that it was a "all-in-one" dock+monitor package. They just have to limbo in under Apple's mark, $999, to make a difference.

 

[deconstruct60]

• Start using Thunderbolt. The good news is it looks like that in the very near future Thunderbolt will be fast enough for GPUs or RAID arrays, so the functionality loss over the Mac Pro won't be as severe.

Not sure where the future tense is driving at here. Or "near future" is has a longer scope than the general usage in these threads.

TB isn't due for an upgrade until 2014. If that is "near future" then never mind.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5405/the-first-thunderbolt-speed-bump-likely-in-2014

If this is in reference to the recent rumors about PCI-e v3 coming to TB then I wouldn't get my hopes up too high. TB has to be faster than PCI-e in order to work without introducing significant latency to the PCI-e data movement. That means they have to top PCI-e v3 speeds and throughput. I can see them going from PCI-e v2 4x to 6x perhaps.

TB is already fast enough for small to midrange RAID set ups. Likewise it is fast enough for "sub $200" PCI-e cards to so improvement over driving a large screen external monitor for a integrated graphics only box.


It also won't be surprising if some of these TB speed bumps require optical cabling to get residential usage approvals (FCC class B).

• Switch to Linux, because Windows 8 looks to abandoning pros as well.

This whole "Metro is evil" stuff is waaaaaaaaaay overblown. Windows 8 is not the precursor to a huge Linux upswing.

Any "pro" that wants to use the same 4 'classic' windows apps all day long .... can ... without ever seeing Metro past the 5 seconds it takes to get past the login start screen. (e.g., just pin those 4 apps to the taskbar and ta-da... no need to start screen or app searching. No need for Metro apps; done. It is really not that hard. People are complaining longer than it take to implement a solution to the use of "restricted to a subset of apps" workflow. )

 

[goMac]

Not sure where the future tense is driving at here. Or "near future" is has a longer scope than the general usage in these threads.

TB isn't due for an upgrade until 2014. If that is "near future" then never mind.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5405/the-first-thunderbolt-speed-bump-likely-in-2014

If this is in reference to the recent rumors about PCI-e v3 coming to TB then I wouldn't get my hopes up too high. TB has to be faster than PCI-e in order to work without introducing significant latency to the PCI-e data movement. That means they have to top PCI-e v3 speeds and throughput. I can see them going from PCI-e v2 4x to 6x perhaps.

I'm referring to both the PCI-e 3.0 upgrade and fiber optic cable release this year. Obviously there has to be a chipset upgrade along side the fiber optic cables to take advantage of the higher speeds, but the new cables open the door.

2014 is also less than two years away, so even if there was a wait until 2014 it's not that bad of a wait.

This whole "Metro is evil" stuff is waaaaaaaaaay overblown. Windows 8 is not the precursor to a huge Linux upswing.

Any "pro" that wants to use the same 4 'classic' windows apps all day long .... can ... without ever seeing Metro past the 5 seconds it takes to get past the login start screen. (e.g., just pin those 4 apps to the taskbar and ta-da... no need to start screen or app searching. No need for Metro apps; done. It is really not that hard. People are complaining longer than it take to implement a solution to the use of "restricted to a subset of apps" workflow. )

All I'm saying is given the amount of complaining from pros about Lion, Windows 8 is a non starter. Windows 8 blows right past Lion and Mountain Lion for cell phonification. If you're leaving Mac because you're doubting Apple's pro commitment, or you don't like Lion, Windows 8 is a step down and a non starter.

Heck, on the ARM version you can't even load your own apps, or run any classic apps aside from MS Office.

Saying "No start menu is totally ok because you can pin the apps you use to the task bar!" is a bizarre workaround. You're basically trying to bend Windows 8 to your will instead of actually using it.

 

[thekev]

Right market it could work. I think you may be constraining to the upper end of the GPU market. For those Mac laptops that are soley stuck with HD3000 or HD4000 and are midrange users an external GPU will put some more life into their laptop ( e.g., MBA ).


For example. right now Apple feels that the TB Display will work. $999.

That's probably going to get competition from

$299 TB docking port with a Display Port connector. (e.g., 1 DP port, 1 FW 800 port , 1 eSATA port , 2-3 USB ports ).

$599 24"-27" IPS Monitor with a Display Port connector plus a few others ( not high color gamut, but a very good mainstream monitor)

which at around $899 is $100 cheaper than Apple's solution. Apple doesn't completely dominate the monitors connected to Mac Pros. Apple isn't going to completely dominate the monitors connected to the laptops either.

Wide gamut monitors are pretty expensive for a really good one, but trending toward Adobe 1998 native gamuts actually creates a lot of problems. I have a feeling they're calculating against an LAB based LUT internally to make corrections for other devices such as colorimeters that are used to compensate for drift in such displays. I'm not 100% sure though. Most of them spit out very vague descriptions of the engineering that sound like they came from the marketing department.

Apple played it a bit safe on this one sticking with an sRGB type panel as far as I can tell. It's not really a bad thing. The only annoying thing with sRGB lcd displays was if they drifted badly, you were left with a rather awkward gamut to be leveraged against output color spaces. LED isn't really favored either given it's differing temperature, but I think switching to that made it easier for Apple to maintain good uniformity across a large display, which was a known issue with some of their previous models.

If IPS monitors slide down $100 to $499, then a $299-399 docking port (probably chuck the eSATA port for PCI-e slot) with a $150 card ( $1048) is in the same price range as the $999 TB display. Throw out an external IPS monitor and it works now. There are lots of mainstream displays at $399 that many folks use everyday.

Plenty of people hate 16:9. If you like 16:10 you can get a decent 24" rather than a 27". The 27" is really just a widened version of the previous 25.5" panels that LG produced. Using the 24" versions which are still reasonably good and quite cost effective, you could probably hit that price point. People may find that expensive for a docking port though.

If enough TB laptops get out there a vendor with a TB monitor that was a bit more like HP's Z1.

http://www.hp.com/united-states/campaigns/workstations/z1_features.html

only without the CPU , disk drive parts would work. Just a PCI-e slot hidden behind the LCD panel so that it was a "all-in-one" dock+monitor package. They just have to limbo in under Apple's mark, $999, to make a difference.

I could definitely see that.

Hmm, the whole Xbox 360 division is a mirage ? And these guys spent years not working on drivers?
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/08/22/building-robust-usb-3-0-support.aspx

Microsoft doesn't write 100% of the drivers. But neither does Apple ( missing xHCI for OS X being the most glaring current example.). However, they do a common subset so that most stuff works in a basic mode.

I wasn't going into the xbox there, just like I wasn't referencing the ipad. I was sticking to typical PC type items.

That's Apple's implementation more so than what can do with it. The upper end iMac has 2. The MBPs probably could have 2 if weren't constrained to having ports only on one side ( e.g. move one of the USB ports to the other side. )

Thunderbolt can only have 7 devices. More than 2 is somewhat goofy because you can't really a whole desktop full of devices connected. It is not USB.

I know it can take 7. My concern was that a single port setup means you're running a display + normal data connection there. It was suggested as being lossless, but yeah I was referencing anandtech.

Daisy chaining is lossless. What I think refering to is reduced bandwidth to remote audio USB. ( e.g., Anantech reports of combos of TB display with audio USB device hooked up along with a Promise RAID on same device). TB has fixed bandwidth. If you put too many devices on a controller and demand isochronous delivery some of them aren't going to get a timeslice.

It is only PCI-e 4x worth of bandwidth. If the user pile ups 5-7x worth of bandwidth on the TB sockets all of it isn't going to get through when used concurrently on heavy workload.

They (intel) suggested it could handle display bandwidth in addition to the quoted amount, but I couldn't figure out how they were accomplishing this. I was aware of the PCI equivalency.

 

[aliensporebomb]

But

HP, Dell and BOXX offer i7 workstations that are half the price of the
the current base Mac Pro and 50% faster. Sorry, Choice is better.
Nobody is fooled. Well, almost nobody.

i7s are not Xeons.

----------

Is Apple waiting for a new processor? Would a high-end Intel i7 Extreme not suffice?

So far, all of the i7 processors specced with the iMacs have been quadcore with hyperthreading.

These are solid performers but they have not bothered to spec out a "super imac" with one of the six-core i7 extreme chips or some of the "really expensive and hard to find" 10 core i7 processors I've seen in order lists but never any marketing for.

Honestly, if you really come down to it where the tower machines excel is I/O.
Xeon processors can do more heavy lifting (the E5 ones of late anyway).

I'd need to replace my i7 iMac in the first place since it simply doesn't have a thunderbolt port. I already have five different external powered cases that could easily have been drives inside a tower machine.

 

[deconstruct60]

I'm referring to both the PCI-e 3.0 upgrade and fiber optic cable release this year. Obviously there has to be a chipset upgrade along side the fiber optic cables to take advantage of the higher speeds, but the new cables open the door.

The fiber optic cables will offer same bandwidth as the current copper solution. They only lower the latency over longer distance and kick off substantially less EM interference. They are no faster. Just longer. That's it.

I wouldn't bet on the upcoming fiber cables to work either. Note that TB puts electronics in the cables ( transcievers on both ends). In order to shave costs it would not be surprising if that modules in the upcoming units were fixed to current bandwidth/latency requirements. It isn't just fiber (or copper) you are buying it is electronics which can be as fixed as the core controller chip is.

2014 is also less than two years away, so even if there was a wait until 2014 it's not that bad of a wait.

That's why there are not dozens of "oh the agony, the Mac Pro is late" threads.

All I'm saying is given the amount of complaining from pros about Lion, Windows 8 is a non starter. Windows 8 blows right past Lion and Mountain Lion for cell phonification. If you're leaving Mac because you're doubting Apple's pro commitment, or you don't like Lion, Windows 8 is a step down and a non starter.

And Linux is a step up?? Folks who fear change tend to fear all changes. Their excuses just get more lame when they get into situations where they discover they never had as much control as they thought they did.

This really isn't about "cell phonification" or "pro commitment". It is mainly about "XXXX won't do things my way, so I will move to a new sandbox". It is rather a stretch to label that "pro" behavior. I see much more of that with 4th graders than pros.

What is going to happen is the noisy, "fear of change" folks will yelp for a while until other folks go out and encode, document, and teach new workflows/methodologies. Most of them will move on to newer things over time at their own pace. The intransigent will hunker down in their cave with tech stack that is stuck in time and eventually get left behind.

Heck, on the ARM version you can't even load your own apps, or run any classic apps aside from MS Office.

1. Microsoft has no future Rosetta retirement problem because they aren't inserting a work-around. Besides, a x86/ARM virtual translator would just soak up more battery. ARM isn't a powerful as x86 and making it emulate an x86 will only make it slower. Nor is Microsoft abandoning the x86 platform.


2. They designed a new API for multiplatform apps WinRT. That's what people can use. Win32 is still there for those who don't want to do multiplatform apps.

iPhone shipped for over a year with no "native apps". It did just fine.

I really don't think most software vendors are going to be interested in shipping two versions of cross compiled Win32 binary and keeping up with all the mismatched cross platform issues as much as Microsoft will for the first couple of years. They never were all that interested back when NT ran on more than x86 before. Not sure why folks expect that to change.

Office is there partially just to justify the higher cost for the ARM version. Since it is bundled it "has to" cost more. Customers also get more though too. if the ARM platform became dominate and the number of desktop, primarily immobile

Microsoft is taking a gamble with WinRT. But they aren't letting go of their Win32 empire either. Depending upon how popular the more mobile apps become they will follow that trend. But if it falls short they haven't kill off goose that lays the golden eggs.

Saying "No start menu is totally ok because you can pin the apps you use to the task bar!" is a bizarre workaround. You're basically trying to bend Windows 8 to your will instead of actually using it.

It is completely not a bizarre workaround for those who have been using Windows 7. It is not a new feature. Nor is it an unpopular feature. I suppose those who have snored on top of XP for the last decade might have to break down and learn something new, but this really about learning Windows 7 features, not 8.

Basically you can use the task bar like the OS X dock if you wish. For those who have 4-6 programs that they spend their entire day inside of .... it works just as effectively as the dock.

 

[goMac]

The fiber optic cables will offer same bandwidth as the current copper solution. They only lower the latency over longer distance and kick off substantially less EM interference. They are no faster. Just longer. That's it.

Intel already said it will allow for increased speeds when the controller supports it.

I wouldn't bet on the upcoming fiber cables to work either. Note that TB puts electronics in the cables ( transcievers on both ends). In order to shave costs it would not be surprising if that modules in the upcoming units were fixed to current bandwidth/latency requirements. It isn't just fiber (or copper) you are buying it is electronics which can be as fixed as the core controller chip is.

I'm pretty sure the transceiver is passive, so it shouldn't be a huge issue.

Regardless, Intel has mentioned future implementations will be fully optical, eliminating the transceiver entirely.

And Linux is a step up?? Folks who fear change tend to fear all changes. Their excuses just get more lame when they get into situations where they discover they never had as much control as they thought they did.

Linux is actually usable for pros.

This really isn't about "cell phonification" or "pro commitment". It is mainly about "XXXX won't do things my way, so I will move to a new sandbox". It is rather a stretch to label that "pro" behavior. I see much more of that with 4th graders than pros.

This isn't "new way" vs. "old way." This is "Microsoft only lets you use a full screen view to open a new program." If Apple started shipping Macs with iOS, would you say that's "unusable for pros" or "just people not wanting to do things the new way"?

What is going to happen is the noisy, "fear of change" folks will yelp for a while until other folks go out and encode, document, and teach new workflows/methodologies. Most of them will move on to newer things over time at their own pace. The intransigent will hunker down in their cave with tech stack that is stuck in time and eventually get left behind.

Again, writing an ass backwards interface and calling it "new", and then saying that people who don't like it are "fearing change" and should suck it up isn't acceptable.

If it's not usable it's not usable. Even Windows veterans are livid.

1. Microsoft has no future Rosetta retirement problem because they aren't inserting a work-around. Besides, a x86/ARM virtual translator would just soak up more battery. ARM isn't a powerful as x86 and making it emulate an x86 will only make it slower. Nor is Microsoft abandoning the x86 platform.

I wasn't talking about translating existing apps. You cannot create a brand new ARM app using the classic Windows interface. Even if Adobe wanted to port Premiere to ARM they simply can't recompile it. You have to port to WinRT which leads me to...

2. They designed a new API for multiplatform apps WinRT. That's what people can use. Win32 is still there for those who don't want to do multiplatform apps.

WinRT is crap for pro apps. Unusable. It would be like Apple slapping an iOS interface with iOS 2.0 APIs on the Mac and telling people to recode their pro apps in that.

Full screen only pro apps? Please. A system that can't have a Photoshop window and a Premiere window open at the same time is not a pro system.

iPhone shipped for over a year with no "native apps". It did just fine.

I'm not sure what the point is. How many pro apps did the iPhone have during that year? (How many pro apps does it have now, for that matter?)

We're talking about pros here.

I really don't think most software vendors are going to be interested in shipping two versions of cross compiled Win32 binary and keeping up with all the mismatched cross platform issues as much as Microsoft will for the first couple of years. They never were all that interested back when NT ran on more than x86 before. Not sure why folks expect that to change.

Great. So everyone will be forced to port to the crappy WinRT layer. Great news for Pros!

Pros don't need these crazy "window" things. And they definitely don't need more than one app at a time.

Microsoft is taking a gamble with WinRT. But they aren't letting go of their Win32 empire either. Depending upon how popular the more mobile apps become they will follow that trend. But if it falls short they haven't kill off goose that lays the golden eggs.

You just got done telling me everyone will have to port to WinRT. So you're telling me... people are going to drop Win32, port to WinRT, and if that doesn't work out port right back to Win32?

Right. WinRT and Win32 are extremely different. It's not an easy port job.

It is completely not a bizarre workaround for those who have been using Windows 7. It is not a new feature. Nor is it an unpopular feature. I suppose those who have snored on top of XP for the last decade might have to break down and learn something new, but this really about learning Windows 7 features, not 8.

First, it doesn't do anything to fix bigger complaints like WinRT only running one app at a time with no Windows (which is the name of the system to begin with.)

Second, the very need for such a workaround shows that it's not ready for Pros. Remember, we're talking about Pros here, not Joe six pack at home.

Basically you can use the task bar like the OS X dock if you wish. For those who have 4-6 programs that they spend their entire day inside of .... it works just as effectively as the dock.

....4-6 programs?

Looking at my dock right now, I have way more than 4-6 programs pinned and open on it.

But again, the very need for this says a lot about Windows 8.

Look, obviously we're in a Mac forum, and we're here because we like the Mac. But go to a Windows fanboy Pro forum. That they're also rejecting Windows 8 is very telling.

 

[Photovore]

How fast is Thunderbolt in practice, anyway? I need one pci x16 slot for a big gpu and the smaller gpu driving my monitors is also in an x16 slot but doesn't need to be.

(But I also want a double handful of xeon cores...)

 

[Jst0rm]

How fast is Thunderbolt in practice, anyway? I use one pci x16 slot for a big gpu (and if my monitors were also TB then that would chew up more bandwidth).

thunderbolt is pci-e x4 right now. So your videocard alone would be throttled.

 

[fox10078]

Tin foil hats abound here. lets be logical and realize the CPU's were just released and HP(Even though has annouced) Dell havent started shipping Workstations like this either. I feel for those of you on iMacs or PPC powermacs.

 

[linuxcooldude]

Tin foil hats abound here. lets be logical and realize the CPU's were just released and HP(Even though has annouced) Dell havent started shipping Workstations like this either. I feel for those of you on iMacs or PPC powermacs.

I think they have alternate surgery to implant a metal plate to the skull, so no tin foil hats are needed.

 

[thekev]

How fast is Thunderbolt in practice, anyway? I need one pci x16 slot for a big gpu and the smaller gpu driving my monitors is also in an x16 slot but doesn't need to be.

(But I also want a double handful of xeon cores...)

I'm not sure of the exact bandwidth actually used by video cards. They do not saturate the full 16 lanes, but PCI slots only go by doubles as in x1 x2 x4 x8 x16. I don't know the entire engineering behind it, but if they can saturate beyond x8 at maximum bandwith, x16 is the next step. Keep in mind many of these will support multiple displays on a x16 card which still doesn't saturate the entire 16 lanes. Bandwidth requirements for gpu + single display would be less, but I'm not sure how much less. Four lanes can obviously drive the connection to the display, as it does with the TB display. Apple doesn't have any 10 bit drivers. I don't know whether this is due to TB display bandwidth or just lack of drivers.

 

[EricTheRed71]

Possibly of interest...

I contacted a dealer for Supermicro cluster servers in regard to when they would be able to ship the new version of the Supermicro Twin server with E5-2600 Xeons.
The dealer estimated no sooner than 4 weeks & probably closer to 6 weeks. The reason given was extremely limited supplies.

I'd imagine Apple will be waiting until there is a good supply of E5s before announcing anything.

 

[Jst0rm]

Possibly of interest...

I contacted a dealer for Supermicro cluster servers in regard to when they would be able to ship the new version of the Supermicro Twin server with E5-2600 Xeons.
The dealer estimated no sooner than 4 weeks & probably closer to 6 weeks. The reason given was extremely limited supplies.

I'd imagine Apple will be waiting until there is a good supply of E5s before announcing anything.

Nice detective work

 

[derbothaus]

I'd imagine Apple will be waiting until there is a good supply of E5s before announcing anything.

Alternately Apple could be the reason for the lack of supply